Month: August 2019

I’ve spent 27 years of my life involved in international education, either as a student studying abroad or as a foreign student adviser to students studying here in the United States. Whether advising student visa holders or undocumented students or recent immigrants, I’ve dealt with the holes, gray areas, mishaps, and long wait times and ultimately the frustrations of our broken immigration system. At one point I toyed with the idea of becoming an immigration attorney, but I quickly realized that I would only become more frustrated. It’s not that lawmakers don’t know what needs to be done; it’s that they lack the political will to do it. I believe people want to come here legally, but our country’s nonsensical immigration laws and excessively long wait times force people into illegal immigration. Our current crisis at the border and our inability to deal with undocumented immigrants is indicative of a nation unsure of its own identity. Especially today.

We must again ask ourselves if we continue to value our identity as a nation of immigrants. I know I do. We must ask what meaning the Statue of Liberty holds for us today? Persons in the Trump administration are acting trying to rewrite the meaning of that great lady. On August 13 they put forth the assertion that the poem inscribed was only welcoming Europeans. Wow!

The thing I love most about shopping at my local California Costco is seeing the diversity of human beings surrounding me, many of whom are speaking in their native tongue or in heavily accented English. My Costco caters to the tastes of people from Latin America, China, Japan, India, and the Middle East and I happily cook a diversity of dishes I came to enjoy in my travels or through relationships with recent immigrants. There are only a few states in the country that can boast of the great diversity of immigrants living together from around the world. My life and this country are enriched by the diversity of human experience, perspectives, and multicolored hands contributing to our workforce and the economy every day. But this Administration is trying roll back diversity through it draconian immigration policies, many of which everyday Americans are not even aware of. But I’m encountering these new policies everyday in my work.

At the root of our political problems with immigration reform are white nationalist who fear demographic change. Unfortunately these people know that it is simple to convince people with limited exposure to human beings who look different from them to believe that their lives are being threatened by these brown outsiders. It’s no surprise that Donald Trump announces his presidential candidacy by describing Mexican immigrants as rapist and murders. He feeds into a pre-existing narrative of those sensitive to the fear of being “replaced” or “displaced” by brown and Jewish immigrants. To these people, immigrants are an economic, political, and physical threat. They have forgotten the benefits of immigration to their families and to the nation as a whole. They have forgotten that their families came here just like immigrants today, seeking a better life and with a great willingness to contribute to the country. Their once foreign foods became everyday American dishes.

I recall a conversation with a white female student who had a Mexican American boyfriend whom she loved. Her fear was that their cultures were too different. I helped her to see what a great opportunity now presented itself to her to become bi-cultural. I helped her to frame the relationship with his family as additive to her life rather than something that would detract from her own sense of culture. You get to add Spanish. You get to add new foods. You get to venture into new experiences and new ways of seeing the world. Once her thoughts moved from seeing the relationship as a threat to her own culture and as an addition of a culture, her entire attitude towards his family changed and they happily got married, enjoying the best of both traditions at the wedding and then into their marriage and family life.

All that said, I believe we need to put more money and resources into hiring more immigration judges and more application adjudicators at USCIS to end the incredibly long processing times for immediate families trying to reunite. I believe we need to pass the Dream Act to give permanent legal status to undocumented children and create a path for legal status to their otherwise law-abiding parents. There should be a fine attached to their breaking the law by crossing the border. I believe illegal border crossings and visa overstays should be a civil matter rather than a criminal offense. I believe we need to increase the green card lottery numbers, H1B visa numbers, and the number of temporary workers for farmers and other seasonal workers.

At the same time, I believe we need to do a much better job of deporting actual criminals and fining employers who hire undocumented workers. Our borders should be stronger and for the moment, we need to handle the crisis at our border by calling more judges to adjudicate asylum claims. And we need to treat asylum seekers and refugees the way we would want to be treated. Dignity, respect, food, shelter, and safety are what are humanity requires of us. These Christians supporting Trump might do well to ask themselves what Jesus would do. Mary and Joseph were refugees. It is also in our interest to provide greater aide to the countries these distressed people are fleeing.

In short, until we as a nation can get on the same page about the benefits of immigration, we will continue to encourage illegal immigration by refusing to pass immigration reform that addresses the actual labor needs of employers and the nature of all human beings that demands safety and opportunity. Our success as a nation has always been attributed to immigrants. The 2020 election will determine who we are and who we are going to be.

I watched an interview with the prominent guitarist Carlos Santana this past week wherein Santana presented his view that national borders are a myth created by unscrupulous people when the reality is that humans are one species occupying a planet together, each human wishing simply to live and thrive. He said that the reality is that there are no borders as evident when viewing the planet from space. I thought about his provocative claim throughout the week and asked myself if I, a person who considers myself to be a global citizen, was also in favor of a border-less world. Given the crisis we face on our own southern border, I really needed to consider my own stance. I care about other human beings and so I questioned the origin of borders and the purpose they serve, if any. What I learned and considered over several days helped me formulate my position.

First, I acknowledge that human history follows a cycle of human migration, community building, unrest, and migration. It is widely believed that humankind began in Africa and gradually spread throughout habitable parts of the world. Many also believe that humans evolved as tribal beings for survival in a harsh world, segregating ourselves on the basis of agreed upon social norms with each tribe protective of its way of life, believing its culture to be superior to others. I surmise that borders were created in order to mitigate conflict between people groups. As long as that tribe stayed on their side of the river, they could worship as they please and live by their own rules. But borders always crumble when human survival is at stake and migrants will resettle where they are most socially comfortable. In my estimation, nothing has changed.

While the drivers of human migration have not changed (for example, poverty, natural disaster, war, oppression, persecution, and lack of opportunity), the ability to migrate has at times been limited by those in leadership. But for much of human history, people have moved freely to find better life. Early on, rulers of growing population centers welcomed newcomers as assets who added wealth through their contribution to taxes, the labor force, and even to serve in armies. There were times when the need for labor was so great that rulers even offered incentives for people to emigrate.

In fact wasn’t until the introduction of serfdom to ensure adequate labor remained where it was needed that the freedom of lower class people was restricted. The Romans were the first to introduce passports so as to limit the mobility of it’s labor force. As new societies emerged, so did the need for labor and it is no wonder that those with guns forced the migration 8-10 million Africans from the 16th – 19th century to the Americas to fill that need as slaves. Mind you, the Islamic states had been using African slave labor since 650 AD so the concept was not new. In addition, great masses emigrated from Europe and Asia fleeing poverty and seeking opportunity in America.

But inevitably, resentment towards newcomers, especially during an economic downturn and times of unemployment grows and newcomers are perceived to be a threat to the livelihood, culture, values, and way of life of majority populations. The ability of some people to assimilate is rewarded with acceptance and citizenship while others, based on skin color or religion remain forever in the category of the foreigner. The rise of nationalism in the face of real demographic and cultural changes is also part of our shared human history. Examples of mass deportations and even genocides or ethnic cleansing by the nationalist leaders who emerge by stoking tribal fears have been repeated throughout human history. These heinous acts are continuing today in places like Myanmar where some 700,000 Rohingya refuges have fled violence and persecution, crossing the border into Bangladesh. The cruelty we are witnessing on our own Southern border and then in the mass shooting in El Paso is the result of this nationalist thinking as opposed to paying careful attention to our shared humanity.

So, borders are indeed a man-made creation. I see them as man’s way to carve out a section of the world where people of like-mind can live together in relative peace. The problem is that the human family must begin to use its capacity to expand what it means to be of like-mind. We should know by now that the values of freedom, democracy, hard work, safety, and respect for others transcend the superficial notion of skin color or blood relations or native language or religion or sexual orientation.

The problem is that governments are too slow to recognize that people will migrate for a better life. The problem with borders is not the border, but the many restrictions being placed on migrants because of the color of their skin or religion. Migrants all over the world are being characterized by nationalist as dangerous when they could actually be assets. History has shown us that human migration is generally good for humanity and that borders should be treated as they once were, a suggestion of what lies within them. Violence only follows when we allow our prejudices to get the better of us and when we make maintaining a more border more important than the humanity for which it was created to serve.

John Locke once questioned the right to restrict the movement of individuals. I am solidly questioning it, too.

I’m not a cynical person, but I found myself inwardly expressing a sense of cynicism when yet another call went out for thoughts and prayers and vigils for victims of three more gun massacres by young men fueled by a hatred of humanity, emboldened by a fear mongering president and enabled by lawmakers who refuse to pass reasonable gun regulations. There is value in a community coming together to mourn the senseless loss of life and to encourage and find strength in the resolve of one another to move on. I know this from last year when my community was the victim. But my thoughts have moved to the need for change. And my prayers have taken on the nature of “Lord, have mercy on us and help us change our ways.” I don’t want more vigils; I want protests. In particular, I’m calling out “Massacre Mitch” also known as “Moscow Mitch” who is the U.S. senate majority leader who blocks protections of our elections and any form of gun control.

Since these shootings, I’ve emailed Massacre Mitch several times and tried calling his office (but lines were overcrowded). I’m glad that citizens have put enough pressure on him so that he will at least now consider passing some form of gun legislation aimed at background checks. That is a start, but it doesn’t go far enough.

The Second Amendment is confusing and has been interpreted in different ways throughout our history. It reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ” Times today are different than they were in 1791 when this Amendment was ratified. The question is whether or not normal citizens who are not part of a militia should be allowed to possess military style weapons without any sort of “regulation”? The thing is, we the people have the right to demand that our lawmakers pass laws that protect the general welfare, especially when it is evident that the status quo isn’t working on our behalf.

I would like to return to the ban on assault weapons. I would also like there to be full background checks, safety licensing, and insurance attached to gun ownership. These are common sense restrictions that any reasonable person who cares about public safety should agree to. We require safety licencing and insurance to drive a car because we understand it is important to keep people safe. Shouldn’t the same be true of owning a lethal weapon like a gun?

As for those who already own assault weapons, I think the government should buy them back and either give them to the military or destroy them. What we can’t allow is for them to remain in the hands of local gangs, gangsters, white nationalist groups, and angry men. True hunters don’t need these guns to hunt. For those gun enthusiasts who enjoy the experience of shooting assault weapons for fun, make them available at shooting ranges where they must remain under strict protection.

The time is past due for Americans to do something drastic about our perverted love affair with guns. We are turning ourselves into prisoners who are afraid to go to the movies, places of worship, concerts, schools, parks, malls, festivals, and even work. The very fabric of our society is being destroyed. The root of the problem might be hatred, resentment, anger and some say, mental illness, but the assess to guns makes it too easy to turn those problems into suicide and murder. The time has come to be truly pro-life and only vote in lawmakers who support sensible gun regulation. These politicians should be earning an “F” rating from the NRA and gun lobby. In the meantime, the pressure has to remain on Massacre Mitch and Trump to pass new gun legislation even if it is only for background checks as a start.

The news media picked winners and losers of the latest round of the Democratic Presidential debates that were televised on Tuesday and Wednesday night last week. I watched all five hours because I really want to make an informed decision about which candidate I will support in the primaries. I walked away with a candidate that the media all but ignored, Senator Michael Bennet from Colorado.

I really liked what he had to say during that contentious second night debate in which too many of our candidates tried to destroy each other and even attacked President Obama. Really? Honestly, it does us no good to rehash the records of a politician from 50 years ago. Any thinking human being changes over time as the world changes, perspectives change, and better information comes to light. Who among us can defend some of our perspectives from our youth? No one remains exactly the same over time and candidates not should be held accountable for words and beliefs that made sense 20, 30, 40 or 50 years ago. I hated that aspect of the debate and will have a difficult time supporting candidates who continue to engage in those tactics. I want to know what each candidate stands for today. That’s relevant and Michael Bennet stood out to me as a reasonable and smart candidate with good ideas.

I went to his website, MichaelBennet.com and was further impressed by his lengthy statement that details his background, his values, and his policies. Both his values and policies align with where I want this country to go. He is also younger and more vibrant than Biden. Even though he might be more soft-spoken, I believe he can stand up to Trump and has the kind of character that can make Americans proud of the presidency again. We need dignity and intelligence in our White House.

And so I donated $10. It’s not much, but more than the minimum of $1 or $5 that he needs to get his numbers up in supporters. His is the very first candidacy that I donated to for 2020. My fear is that he isn’t getting the media attention he deserves and may not make it to the next round of debates if enough voters don’t support him. How about we give more media attention to candidates who aren’t just provocative, but reasonable? Thankfully, he isn’t the only candidate I have my eye on.

I also like Biden and Warren for President. I like Bullock, Harris, Gillibrand, and Buttigieg for vice president. My dream ticket would be Bennet-Harris at this point. I also dream about Warren-Bullock or Warren-Buttigieg. A Biden-Harris or Biden-Gillibrand ticket would also be acceptable. This doesn’t mean that I don’t like most of the other candidates. I actually do.

Each of them raised issues that their candidacy brought to light. Bernie makes us think more about income inequality, free college, and Medicare for all. Yang makes us think about a universal income. Booker highlights immigration and criminal justice. And Williamson made the best case for reparations.

I realized that I care most about integrity, intelligence, and sound policies that I believe will improve the lives of all Americans. So, for me, at this point in the election cycle, I’m supporting Michael Bennet. What a surprise.